Skip to main content

Goodbye Happiness

Standards exist in the world, whether they are personal or cultural. Sometimes they come into conflict, and when this clash happens, it detracts from one’s happiness. Freud, in Civilization and Its Discontents, addresses how, in conforming to the standards society has set in place, one cannot follow their own desires, which leads to unfulfillment. Additionally, following the ethical standards society has in place have ramifications. Civilization’s goal to survive is impeded by the fact that everyone has their own desires, sexual or otherwise, which leads to wickedness.
Civilization was formed so that mankind might better survive. It offers protection from outsiders and provides a sense of security. While there are benefits that arise from civilization, it has downsides as well. The major one, according to Freud, is “the conflict between civilization and sexuality [and it] is caused by the circumstance that sexual love is a relationship between two people … whereas civilization is founded on relations between larger groups or persons” (49). Humans have a desire to form many connections to create a larger group. However, this act goes against the desire to bond with one person, in whom all happiness can apparently be found. As a result, being forced to interact with others takes away time and energy from the relationship. One of culture’s standards is that it prohibits polygamy, which would cater to the sexual need and connect more people, but instead monogamy reigns supreme, therefore subtracting happiness from a person’s life. As a result, what could potentially benefit humanity most is not allowed to happen. The need for community, then, detracts from the monogamous relationship. Civilization controls what humans can and cannot do with their sexual desires, inhibiting some people’s ability to achieve perfect happiness.
Despite civilization’s attempts to provide morality, a result of its infringement on happiness is wickedness. Freud says that “conformity to the highest ethical standards constitutes a betrayal of the interests of culture, for it puts a direct premium on wickedness” (52). Following the highest ethical rules would mean listening to self, which results in betraying what society wants. However, society has a set of standards because each wants something different for himself, so in order to unite all men rules are established so the world can run smoothly. A problem arises because conforming to culture’s rules can mean violating personal ones due to conflict of interests. Acting against one’s beliefs is one of the most terrible acts one can commit because it means not being true to self. Therefore, civilization and self become at odds. However, society cannot abolish its laws. After all, men would then be free to act however they wish, and then nothing is accomplished because each pursues his own desires. This notion is also known as relativism, which then breaks down since everyone follows different paths and believes whatever they want. Society cannot survive on relativism, otherwise there would be no point in having one to begin with because rules would change person to person and interests would constantly conflict. Freud shows this line of thinking when he discusses loving your neighbor as yourself. He says, “If I love someone, he must be worthy of it in some way or other” (50). Each person would be treated differently by every person based on what could be gained, even though everyone has value. If one person’s wish, then, is to not love a person, but the dictates of civilization demand otherwise, so the person follows them so as to be a proper citizen, this act also causes man to violate himself. However, society cannot function if everyone follows his own wishes, and man wishes for it to survive, so he chooses dedication to the whole over dedication to himself. Choosing the group causes violation of self, resulting in wickedness.
Freud, though he has come to valid conclusions, does not come to truth. As stated earlier, humans are creatures that need socialization. Separating oneself from all of humanity, though it provides one with plenty of time and energy to spend on the significant other, also leaves another basic human need unfilled. Civilization might pull humans away from desires of the sexual nature, but it also helps fulfill another type. Polygamy also would not be beneficial because no two people could be exclusive. Additionally, it would not solve Freud’s happiness issue since the couple did not need more people to begin with to feel that way, and now more people are involved. Then there is the problem of having multiple spouses, which could cause aggression, which Freud aims to avoid, because there would be conflict over who would be with who. Also, while violating one’s beliefs is a sin, it is also important to note that all convictions cannot be right, so people would continually butt heads over whose motivations are right and whose are wrong when they are opposing. He also assumes that all happiness is connected to sexuality by continually relating the two. He errs in this regard because not all merriment comes from this one area. Therefore, civilization cannot completely impose on one’s happiness. Freud has hit upon some truths, but the way he views them is incorrect, or he makes takes his views to the extreme.
Civilization sets up standards that infringe on humans’ happiness and, as a result, cause wickedness. Freud believes that society is subtracting from the source of the joy because of the regulations it places on sexuality. These regulations lead to disregarding one’s own ambitions in order to comply with civilization. In turn, this leads to wickedness because the person has violated their ethical standards for the ones placed over them. Freud, however, draws incorrect conclusions based on his presuppositions, so while he has correctly identified some issues, on the whole, his findings are not true.

Comments

  1. Great essay, Crystal! I particularly enjoyed your explanation of Freud's logic and your rebuttals due to how much I disagree with his thinking. While reading Civilization and Its Discontents, it seemed as though that on every page I found something else that I disliked about Freud's beliefs. Anyways, I really like how you unbiasedly explain Freud and then return with not just your opinions but also with supporting arguments near the end. Specifically, I totally agree with your argument against polygamy. Though Freud may have a point that multiple relationships would give an individual more interactions with society, the several relationships would in actuality bring more harm than good. Ultimately, people in these types of relationships would be emotionally hurt and as a result, unhappy. Moreover, I completely agree that Freud puts too much emphasis on sexuality as a source of happiness. Although sexuality certainly can bring happiness, there is much more in life that can do the same. More importantly though, Freud especially errs in that none of these avenues can bring true happiness. Instead, the only true happiness can be found by developing a relationship with God. Unfortunately, Freud misses this ever important truth due to his disbelief in our Creator. Lastly, I also believe that Freud puts too much emphasis on the need for civilization to make us happy. We cannot rely on anyone to "make" us happy. By Freud's expectation of society, happiness becomes a superficial blowing of the wind that comes and goes. Hence, we must instead determine to have happiness within ourselves no matter the situation. However, I recognize that my Christian beliefs may make me a bit biased in this area. What are your thoughts on this subject?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Continuation of the Great Conversation

Reading. Discussion. Two things the Great Books program revolves around. Without them, Great Books wouldn't be the same and likely wouldn't exist. As I was reading The Screwtape Letters , I began noticing connections between the content and the program (and, to some extent, my thesis). The great conversation doesn't stop upon graduation, it flows throughout our entire lives. The form may change but it still continues; it's no longer sitting in a classroom discussion but instead finding connections in our daily lives, often between literature and life. Lewis discusses various ways that we can be led into sin and away from God in The Screwtape Letters . Many of the issues he mentions are still highly prevalent today. In one letter, Screwtape tells Wormwood about the progress they've made in disassociating the past from the present, mainly in terms of reading. By convincing modern readers to focus on anything but the truth behind a book, they've caused humanity to ...

Contract Course: Newton and Leibniz: Influenced and Influencing

People influence others, either for the better or for the worse. This fact is clearly seen in the priority dispute between Isaac Newton, an English mathematician and scientist, and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, a German mathematician and lawyer, over the invention of fluxions, or differential calculus, calculus concerned with derivatives and differentials, as a result of both releasing their findings around the same time. Claiming priority was important because the person received the recognition for their accomplishment, thereby showing that anyone else that published similar theories was most likely copying. Newton and Leibniz had multiple areas of influence, including other mathematicians, journals, or colleagues. The men would not have gotten to the point they were at in their knowledge and careers if it were not for multiple parties. The priority dispute over calculus was heavily influenced by the people who supported or criticized Newton and Leibniz, whether in the early or later st...

Judas: A Lesson in Discipleship

Throughout The Cost of Discipleship , Bonhoeffer addresses what being a disciple of Jesus truly looks like. This discourse leads to the call to discipleship, for one cannot be a disciple unless they are called, and then briefly to the apostles. The apostles were called by Jesus, which includes Judas Iscariot. The fact that Jesus called Judas presents the question of why He would present the offer of discipleship to him since He would have known what the future held. Additionally, Judas blended right in with the rest of the apostles, none of them ever believing that any of the group would turn on Jesus. Judas’ calling holds many lessons for Christians regarding the nature of the call to discipleship, the people who are at church, and of one’s own calling. Judas is a complex figure in the Bible, being called to discipleship but betraying his master. Bonhoeffer presents an assessment of Judas: “Even Judas went forth to Christ-work, and the fact that he did so will always be a dark rid...